4.7 Article

Decompressive surgery for the treatment of malignant infarction of the middle cerebral artery (DESTINY)

期刊

STROKE
卷 38, 期 9, 页码 2518-2525

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.107.485649

关键词

decompressive surgery; malignant middle cerebral artery infarction; randomized trials

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background and Purpose - Decompressive surgery (hemicraniectomy) for life-threatening massive cerebral infarction represents a controversial issue in neurocritical care medicine. We report here the 30-day mortality and 6- and 12-month functional outcomes from the DESTINY trial. Methods - DESTINY (ISRCTN01258591) is a prospective, multicenter, randomized, controlled, clinical trial based on a sequential design that used mortality after 30 days as the first end point. When this end point was reached, patient enrollment was interrupted as per protocol until recalculation of the projected sample size was performed on the basis of the 6-month outcome (primary end point=modified Rankin Scale score, dichotomized to 0 to 3 versus 4 to 6). All analyses were based on intention to treat. Results - A statistically significant reduction in mortality was reached after 32 patients had been included: 15 of 17 (88%) patients randomized to hemicraniectomy versus 7 of 15 (47%) patients randomized to conservative therapy survived after 30 days (P = 0.02). After 6 and 12 months, 47% of patients in the surgical arm versus 27% of patients in the conservative treatment arm had a modified Rankin Scale score of 0 to 3 (P = 0.23). Conclusions - DESTINY showed that hemicraniectomy reduces mortality in large hemispheric stroke. With 32 patients included, the primary end point failed to demonstrate statistical superiority of hemicraniectomy, and the projected sample size was calculated to 188 patients. Despite this failure to meet the primary end point, the steering committee decided to terminate the trial in light of the results of the joint analysis of the 3 European hemicraniectomy trials.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据